Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks (Part II)

[Pixiedustmaker]

Leave a Legacy can be re-themed as a memorial to the population of Alderaan. Seriously, though I love Star Wars and I love Epcot. However, I would not love them together.

Outside of fan preferences, I can't see them ever doing a detailed/permanent Star Wars overlay on Epcot as presumably this would involve completely changing some of (all of?) the rides in future world, such as SSE, Universe of Energy, . . . it would cost an astronomical amounts of $$$. And Future World would never look like a world in the Star Wars universe, but just something retro-fitted to look like Star Wars.

I think that given apparent ride capacity issues at WDW, they would go with building a 'StarWarsland' in a current theme park, or more likely—in a fifth gate. They are out of room at DHS, Epcot has a little room (such as the former of Wonder of Life Pavilion), but you don't want to confuse the strong themes Epcot already has going. AK, doubt it would ever get Star Wars unless your talking about the Wookie home world, and I don't think StarWarsLand would work well in Tomorrowland, though a complete retheming would be possible.

If they are going to build a StarWarsland, I think they'd have the most creative freedom by building from the ground-up, rather than trying to simply re-purpose existing areas of the parks.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

We would then build another EPCOT elsewhere on the property that would be the future city that Walt intended to be. Maybe a hotel or resort if a real city presented too many issues.

There's this interesting series on the History Channel, "The Men Who Built America", and it provides an unvarnished look at industrial titans such as J. P. Morgan, Carnegie. Really interesting from the perspective of new technology, like mass produced steel and electricity, and these industrial titans used this technology to change America in terms of allowing new types of cities/construction to be completed.

A Future City is a cool concept, but I think it would move forward if somebody was able to engineer a new, and cheaper, way of building cities, in addition to designing every detail. Stylistically, sure, it would be be great to have imagineers design a city, but I think we need anti-gravity technology, or buildings that can be quickly grown, to make the city eye-poppingly new and exciting.

What ever happened to super-conductors? What if somebody designed a room temperature superconducting magnet that could be cheaply made and allowed a light rail train to zip around the city on less energy than it costs to run a 100-watt bulb?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

There's this interesting series on the History Channel, "The Men Who Built America", and it provides an unvarnished look at industrial titans such as J. P. Morgan, Carnegie. Really interesting from the perspective of new technology, like mass produced steel and electricity, and these industrial titans used this technology to change America in terms of allowing new types of cities/construction to be completed.

A Future City is a cool concept, but I think it would move forward if somebody was able to engineer a new, and cheaper, way of building cities, in addition to designing every detail. Stylistically, sure, it would be be great to have imagineers design a city, but I think we need anti-gravity technology, or buildings that can be quickly grown, to make the city eye-poppingly new and exciting.

What ever happened to super-conductors? What if somebody designed a room temperature superconducting magnet that could be cheaply made and allowed a light rail train to zip around the city on less energy than it costs to run a 100-watt bulb?

Exactly. This is the thinking I've been harping on for the new Tomorrowland. Using computers to produce detail is a trend these days and making complex, even unbuildable forms possible with computer aided design could be great. Just teasing some "out of the box" ways of looking at design itself could be really exciting. You don't even have to have it all figured out, but prototype it as a model and show many options to solve the same issue. I do wanna watch that show on the HC too. You are not the first to recommend it.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Outside of fan preferences, I can't see them ever doing a detailed/permanent Star Wars overlay on Epcot as presumably this would involve completely changing some of (all of?) the rides in future world, such as SSE, Universe of Energy, . . . it would cost an astronomical amounts of $$$. And Future World would never look like a world in the Star Wars universe, but just something retro-fitted to look like Star Wars.

I think that given apparent ride capacity issues at WDW, they would go with building a 'StarWarsland' in a current theme park, or more likely—in a fifth gate. They are out of room at DHS, Epcot has a little room (such as the former of Wonder of Life Pavilion), but you don't want to confuse the strong themes Epcot already has going. AK, doubt it would ever get Star Wars unless your talking about the Wookie home world, and I don't think StarWarsLand would work well in Tomorrowland, though a complete retheming would be possible.

If they are going to build a StarWarsland, I think they'd have the most creative freedom by building from the ground-up, rather than trying to simply re-purpose existing areas of the parks.

True, I'm sure they will just build something new instead of recycling a place like EPCOT. I'd level alot of it as you are right, in that it does not serve either idea well to "band aid" your way through an idea. I'd like to see it as a new type of experience, more of a SW exotic Resort with hotels where the pavilions are that are "other worlds". Incredible to stay in the underwater kingdom or one of his exotic locales. I'd keep the aquarium and SSE, but rethink the rest. WS can stay as a look across at the "other galaxy". I do think having the theme park version of EPCOT negates them ever building the true vision, but the Death Star as an icon is pretty negative (but I'd show up!).

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

I do think having the theme park version of EPCOT negates them ever building the true vision, but the Death Star as an icon is pretty negative (but I'd show up!).

I could see a Death Star SSE as part of a Star Wars segment to a night show. I figure they could:

1. Project a Death Star image onto Space Ship Earth at night.
2. Have lasers shot at the Death Star's laser from areas on the lake, around Future World, and it would look like the Death Star was shooting at these "targets".
3. Use pyrotechnics coordinated with the lasers so it looks like the Death Star is blowing stuff up.
4. Have Mickey/Luke Skywalker blow up the Death Star.

Of course, the French might get upset if every night during the summer the Death Star was blowing up their pavilion.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

I do wanna watch that show on the HC too.

The Men Who Built America is a great history show, and it sort of illustrates how the world is smaller at the top as all of the big industrial movers knew each other, and competed with each other. You also get a sense that some, like J. P. Morgan, were sort of ruthless versions of Walt Disney in that they had a vision, and hired other people to work out the details.

On the show, J. P. Morgan bought Eidson's, Edison General Electric Company, sort-of kicked out Edison and changed the name, simply, to General Electric after merging with a rival firm.

 

[The Rat King]

I hate to park hop the conversation from Epcot to Hollywood Studios, but this goes back to an initial comment/conversation from the start of this thread.

It's about escapism and game changers in the industry. With everything Disney has done to expand the Magic Kingdom and make it more interactive, it makes me thing of the possibilities in other parks. In regards to Hollywood Studios, I feel there's equal if not more opportunity for experimentation. Right away when you enter you feel like you are part of a movie studio, at least from what I remember. It's an ode to the hey days of movies from the past. And then you branch out and each attractions seems like a show with only the Rollercoaster and Tower of Terror feeling like actual rides (again from what I remember, although the newer Toy Story area was an Arcade ride)

If Disney really wanted to build up their area and wanted to attract more people to that park to turn it from a half-day thing to a place to be then I think they should ditch their show efforts and do what they have started working on in the Magic Kingdom which is putting you *into* the experience. What I mean is, they already have you starting in a movie studio setting. From there they could offshoot you by putting you in different lands. And I don't mean like Lucasland with the combined Star Wars and Indiana Jones exhibits but entire mini worlds based on one film series and then another. Maybe not directly with Lucas properties but they have the whole disney and pixar catalog to work with. It's a little speculative (if that's the right word to use) and I'm not trying to start a "dream a new theme park" idea thing but to me the concept of total immersion is very important in regards to the future of the company. I think it's the easiest chance to expand the park and really pull out all the stops. You can make the excuse that stepping onto each film set transports you to that other world. Think about how beautiful an area based on Tim Burton's version of Alice and Wonderland would be? The new Oz film, a more expanded Pirates of the Caribbean presence. You would go to Magic Kingdom for the initial taste and the historical Disney side of things and then go to Hollywood Studios to experience those worlds firsthand. Fully interactive and stealing from Universal: You can legit ride the movies.

It does come across a little too myself-as-an-imagineer but I hate how Hollywood Studios has so much wasted potential and all of the focus of change in the parks seems to drift over to Epcot. There's a lot of cool ideas in regards to what they should do with Epcot but it seems easier to start with Studios. I feel like that's the most underdeveloped of them all. Well, not including Animal Kingdom but thats because I don't go there for the Zoo aspect.

Again I mean this less in a what we could do way and more of a "Hey, we already have the groundwork, the material, and our goals set on progress, lets experiment by pushing the boundaries" way.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

DHS is a bit of a "blank canvas" in terms of potential. Where is the themed Hollywood style hotel or Resort?

 

[elchippo]

I think they made a mistake by making Mermaid and Dumbo so different in terms of looks. I think the nice medieval-ish/renaissance? theme of Belle's village could have been extended through FLE, and the rides could have been suited to this. The big upside during the holidays is that they could decorate this area and add snow and it really would have an amazing vista. Mermaid aside, they could have put in a Brave dark ride, a Tangled dark ride, and a lot of others which would have matched Belle's theme which I think is the superior theme/heart of the area.

A great way to transition Mermaid to Dumbo would have been a Storybook Canal boat ride...but I don't think such quaint attractions are developed anymore.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Today marks 50 years since the "Swiss Family Treehouse" opened at Disneyland. I was still at WDI when it changed over to the Tarzan overlay. Back then, money to improve show or add attractions was hard to come by. Tony Baxter, who was faced with these challenges had a unique way of dealing with the money that WAS on the table, Rehab dollars. He would approach the operating group at the park and say "Why spend all of these millions re-leafing the same tree, only to have it be no more interesting than it was, when we can add some marketing dollars to that rehab budget and have a new attraction?" That made sense to them and was how the Tarzan Attraction was born. Bob Baranick was the lead designer on it. In fact, the Tahitian Terrace Restaurant was losing money and was faced with immediate closure. The makeover into the popular (but eventually too costly to operate) "Aladdin's Oasis", was a stop gap solution to losing the Terrace, as it was on the chopping block.

Decisions happen in the context of their times. In the early nineties attendance at DL was way down (to the point of the park losing money) and the park believed that it had added attractions in the past and in turn, increased its operating costs to an unsustainable level. So the solution from the business side was to reduce that cost and take away attractions. What a bleak time for me to be a show director for WDI down there! Like being an Aristocrat during the French Revolution! (Let them eat Dole Whip?) The Skyway, instead of being upgraded and replaced, was shuttered. Cascade Peak was going to be torn down, no replacement. Unthinkable. These trade offs were to displace the increased labor of new high cost to operate shows like Indiana Jones. Corporate gave the parks no additional money for this and they had to balance their books. Maintenance crews were cut back too. You had an opinion, but no real power to stop these kinds of developments. It was more of how to be creative with what you had. Tony was good at that. The Eisner 20% quarterly growth mandate had to be achieved despite best intentions. No matter what they said, the show suffered and you could complain and sometimes you won. Fortunately, that formula eventually proved to be unsustainable in of itself, and then things changed to being a bit more balanced. Dark days indeed.

Until Bob Iger wrote the check to refurbish Disneyland for the 50th, things were in a steep decline. The guests returned and the quality philosophy under Bob flourished.

I must say I miss the Treehouse as it was (a true fantasy of mine to live like that), but still can enjoy the Swisskapolka!

 

[dreamscometrue]

Today marks 50 years since the "Swiss Family Treehouse" opened at Disneyland. I was still at WDI when it changed over to the Tarzan overlay. Back then, money to improve show or add attractions was hard to come by. Tony Baxter, who was faced with these challenges had a unique way of dealing with the money that WAS on the table, Rehab dollars. He would approach the operating group at the park and say "Why spend all of these millions re-leafing the same tree, only to have it be no more interesting than it was, when we can add some marketing dollars to that rehab budget and have a new attraction?" That made sense to them and was how the Tarzan Attraction was born. Bob Baranick was the lead designer on it. In fact, the Tahitian Terrace Restaurant was losing money and was faced with immediate closure. The makeover into the popular (but eventually too costly to operate) "Aladdin's Oasis", was a stop gap solution to losing the Terrace, as it was on the chopping block.

Decisions happen in the context of their times. In the early nineties attendance at DL was way down (to the point of the park losing money) and the park believed that it had added attractions in the past and in turn, increased its operating costs to an unsustainable level. So the solution from the business side was to reduce that cost and take away attractions. What a bleak time for me to be a show director for WDI down there! Like being an Aristocrat during the French Revolution! (Let them eat Dole Whip?) The Skyway, instead of being upgraded and replaced, was shuttered. Cascade Peak was going to be torn down, no replacement. Unthinkable. These trade offs were to displace the increased labor of new high cost to operate shows like Indiana Jones. Corporate gave the parks no additional money for this and they had to balance their books. Maintenance crews were cut back too. You had an opinion, but no real power to stop these kinds of developments. It was more of how to be creative with what you had. Tony was good at that. The Eisner 20% quarterly growth mandate had to be achieved despite best intentions. No matter what they said, the show suffered and you could complain and sometimes you won. Fortunately, that formula eventually proved to be unsustainable in of itself, and then things changed to being a bit more balanced. Dark days indeed.

Until Bob Iger wrote the check to refurbish Disneyland for the 50th, things were in a steep decline. The guests returned and the quality philosophy under Bob flourished.

I must say I miss the Treehouse as it was (a true fantasy of mine to live like that), but still can enjoy the Swisskapolka!

Thanks for this post. Very interesting insight as to the 'behind the scenes' to what many guests observed about DL during those years.

This leads me to ask if you think that WDW is currently experiencing 'Dark Days' in the manner that DL did. I know some forum members here think this to be the case, and while I believe that maintenance and show are not what they were 15-20 years ago, I still see mostly good in the parks and not a situation analogous to that of DL.

Also, no matter what your reply, do you expect WDW to improve as management changes and we close in on it's 50th?

Thanks. I very much enjoy your insights on this forum.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

"Why spend all of these millions re-leafing the same tree, only to have it be no more interesting than it was, when we can add some marketing dollars to that rehab budget and have a new attraction?" That made sense to them and was how the Tarzan Attraction was born. Bob Baranick was the lead designer on it. In fact, the Tahitian Terrace Restaurant was losing money and was faced with immediate closure. The makeover into the popular (but eventually too costly to operate) "Aladdin's Oasis", was a stop gap solution to losing the Terrace, as it was on the chopping block.

Decisions happen in the context of their times. In the early nineties attendance at DL was way down (to the point of the park losing money) and the park believed that it had added attractions in the past and in turn, increased its operating costs to an unsustainable level. So the solution from the business side was to reduce that cost and take away attractions. What a bleak time for me to be a show director for WDI down there! Like being an Aristocrat during the French Revolution! (Let them eat Dole Whip?) The Skyway, instead of being upgraded and replaced, was shuttered. Cascade Peak was going to be torn down, no replacement. Unthinkable.

I must say I miss the Treehouse as it was (a true fantasy of mine to live like that), but still can enjoy the Swisskapolka!

Thanks for the great stories Eddie, it is really nice learning a little bit about behind the scenes operations of places I see all the time at Disneyland.

As far as Aladdin's Oasis goes, given how this location shares a kitchen with the Jolly Holiday now, I think they could open it up to counter service and use some marketing money from the Jungle Cruise movie to theme it like an eatery in the genre of the film. Such as the "dockside cafe", or something. They could condense it with Bengal Barbecue, if that would save $. I think Aladdin's popularity has long since waned.

I read that they tore down Cascade Peaks to make way for a "Geyser Mountain", but then DCA didn't . . . work out so well, so they had to put the cash towards the sister park.

SkyWay was for fun for kids, but it kind of ruined the magic for me in a way because you could see the ratty roofs over the showbuildings in Fantasyland, though on the monorail going to Epcot you can see some pretty poorly maintained roofs over the turnstiles at Epcot and on other Epcot buildings.

Swiss Family Robinson was really nice, and if they make a remake to that film, maybe they'll take out the Tarzan stuff.

 

[Omnispace]

I hate to be a naysayer. There have been lots of fantastic realms depicted in the Star Wars films but I recall most of them being pretty inhospitable. They were created that way to enhance the conflict in the story. The grittiness of many of them remind me of Disneyland's Tomorrowland 1998 and we all know how unpopular that was. It looked great at night but the dull browns and greens sucked all the life out of the place during the day.

I agree that Star Wars does have an incredible mythology suitable for a theme park experience so the challenge would be to place those stories in a setting that people would want to enjoy on their vacations. From the diehard Star Wars fans I would be interested to know what experiences they would want realized. I have to admit watching the sun(s)set on Tatooine would be pretty cool.

Resort-wise, Naboo would be a nice place to visit and of course Endor is only a 5 hour drive for me.

 

[Omnispace]

Interesting thing to note about the Swiss Family Treehouse, the way it was staged, as if the family was about to return at any moment, added a lot of realism to the attraction. The waterworks added a fantastic kinetic component and the Swisspolka simply made the place cheerful. As long at it was playing there were going to be no tigers or pirates attacking. On the other hand, the plastic characters in Tarzan's Treehouse break the illusion of place. I also miss the waterworks. I honestly don't understand why anyone thought it would be a good idea to recreate the place where Tarzan's parents were killed but at least the approach worked to secure the funds to renovate the attraction.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Thanks for this post. Very interesting insight as to the 'behind the scenes' to what many guests observed about DL during those years.

This leads me to ask if you think that WDW is currently experiencing 'Dark Days' in the manner that DL did. I know some forum members here think this to be the case, and while I believe that maintenance and show are not what they were 15-20 years ago, I still see mostly good in the parks and not a situation analogous to that of DL.

Also, no matter what your reply, do you expect WDW to improve as management changes and we close in on it's 50th?

Thanks. I very much enjoy your insights on this forum.

Obviously the quality of the NFL shows the current administration's interest in opening projects that are first rate. I don't have any special insight as to the upkeep issues, other than knowing that you can only justify spending a certain percentage of your revenue each year of rehabs and they have to spread it out. I have confidence in Bob Iger and John Lassiter in this area and that they will keep as much money as they can flowing into those things, but it probably takes time. WDW has so many things that need help, it will be hard to not have something falling apart somewhere. Again, I'm not intimate to the internal issues, I do know that Bob respects quality and that is the way he is personally and it shows in his decisions.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

They have pictures of the Casey Jr. Circus Train/Storybook refurb up on Miceage. Have to say I'm really disappointed with the new safety railings. They needed to widened the top of the bridge, so they cantilevered it out, with what looks like mistmatched brick panels. The railings look . . . cheap and not themed to the interior of the ride, plus the worst part is the columns which anchor the railings—ugly. I wish they'd gone with railings that looked like wood, and that they extended the bridge out, instead of just cantilevering out the top of it. Have no idea why the brick is mismatched.

I don't feel that WDI was involved much in this supposedly minor change as the quality of work is what I would expect in terms of general contractors just trying to sorta-kinda make things match.

I doubt the Alice fix will look much better.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

They have pictures of the Casey Jr. Circus Train/Storybook refurb up on Miceage. Have to say I'm really disappointed with the new safety railings. They needed to widened the top of the bridge, so they cantilevered it out, with what looks like mistmatched brick panels. The railings look . . . cheap and not themed to the interior of the ride, plus the worst part is the columns which anchor the railings—ugly. I wish they'd gone with railings that looked like wood, and that they extended the bridge out, instead of just cantilevering out the top of it. Have no idea why the brick is mismatched.

I don't feel that WDI was involved much in this supposedly minor change as the quality of work is what I would expect in terms of general contractors just trying to sorta-kinda make things match.

I doubt the Alice fix will look much better.

This could have been much better, it is in the scale, details and proportion. It's too bad that the new coarsing clips the Keystones right off the tops of the arches. The logic of the blocks floating in space without beams is a bit odd too. It may be been better to attach an open iron walkway to the stone without making it so visually thick, as a thinner and lighter catwalk, it would conflict less with the arches and more or less disappear. Notice how the light colored railing stands out and states it's human scale, you could paint the iron dark green so as not to be obvious. Wood is a good idea too, but then it might have to be thick.

"Backseat Imagineering" is always tempting so I'll stop now!

 

[Eddie Sotto]

We still talk about the modular construction of the Contemporary Hotel and how each room was built offsite and slid into place in it's "pigeon hole" in the wall of I Beams. Today the Chinese have gone further with a 30 Story building built in....15. They now plan the world's tallest in only 90. Here's a video of how they did the 30 story one and prefabbed the floors and girders. Amazing.

 

[dreamscometrue]

Obviously the quality of the NFL shows the current administration's interest in opening projects that are first rate. I don't have any special insight as to the upkeep issues, other than knowing that you can only justify spending a certain percentage of your revenue each year of rehabs and they have to spread it out. I have confidence in Bob Iger and John Lassiter in this area and that they will keep as much money as they can flowing into those things, but it probably takes time. WDW has so many things that need help, it will be hard to not have something falling apart somewhere. Again, I'm not intimate to the internal issues, I do know that Bob respects quality and that is the way he is personally and it shows in his decisions.

Thanks very much for your reply. The comments on these boards sometimes talk about issues in maintenance once projects are handed over to park ops, or whatever it's called. I appreciated your comment that only so much spending annually can be allocated to maintenance. Without pretending to know how the economics of a company this size works, I know that you can't simply take say another $100 million or more for annual upkeep without going through a ton of red tape and logistics. No matter how big the company, money has to be allocated. I see WDW as analogous with any aging city, that is having aging infrastructure. There's little reason for newer attractions to have issues, except that with only a certain annual budget, more and more of the money might have to be earmarked for aging attractions, refurbs, etc. Having said all that, however, I can understand why large issues might not be fixed (ie: Yeti) but I would think that inexpensive fixes (the infamous postings of chipped paint, burned out light bulbs, etc.) would not be addressed practically daily. Even in my previous (old) house, I had to save to get a new roof, but the little things were always done. I could afford those.

It's also encouraging to read your comments about Bob Iger, because there seem to be some people who very much blame him for any park issues and suggest he doesn't care about quality. I've never thought that to be the case. I believe the new Fantasyland created under his watch, and Carsland at DCA, are as good as anything I've seen from WDI. These 2 projects give hope that future Disney Parks projects will be of a quality that some would argue has been missing for a few years.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

We still talk about the modular construction of the Contemporary Hotel and how each room was built offsite and slid into place in it's "pigeon hole" in the wall of I Beams. Today the Chinese have gone further with a 30 Story building built in....15. They now plan the world's tallest in only 90. Here's a video of how they did the 30 story one and prefabbed the floors and girders. Amazing.

Very interesting.

However, this building took more than 15 days to build it as time was also spent pre-fabricating the sections of the building. And, it looks like just the floors/ceiling were prefabed. Obviously, this could help speed production in China, but the Chinese don't have the same types of building codes and required inspections as in the U.S.. There are safety concerns given that this is new technology.

According to this article, http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/07/world/la-fg-china-instant-building-20120308, one month later some of the finishing work, i.e. room work, electrical/drywall wasn't finished yet. The 15 day thing is only how long it took them to finish the vertical rise of the building.

While such "off-the-shelf" constructions will save time, and lives, and will become more common, if different exteriors aren't used, then you'd start to get buildings which look a lot a like . . . everywhere.

And a lot of architects would be out of business, IMHO.

Beyond modular construction, i.e. this company is going to build a 200-story building using the same modules, I think that computer drafting, and robotic prefabrication will eventually allow architects to design, and then automation will allow prefab floor/ceilling construction, then finishing work/inspections.

Prefab makes sense $ and safety-wise, modular not so much as clients want different size rooms/floor layouts.